Gun left at Capitol by Colorado state Rep. Jared Wright

Where I enter the Colorado Capitol, there is a âNo Firearmsâ sign and a metal detector. But not for Rep. Jared Wright, who left his firearm unattended in a committee room on Feb. 6.

Think about the school children touring. Suppose one found Rep. Wrightâs gun. Suppose a deranged individual wandered in and got it.

And suppose now we ask Rep. Wright to enter the Capitol the same way I do â through metal detectors.

I donât feel safe with someone who carelessly leaves his firearm laying around. Nor do I trust that without going through a metal detector as I do, Wright will abide by his agreement with the governor that he now leave his firearm at home.

Laurie Langley, Littleton

This letter was published in the Feb. 22 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

You’re welcome! Look, you know I’m as pro-2nd amendment as you can get, your post just reminded me of an exchange I had with a Brady campaign supporter. He told me, “There is no such thing as a law-abiding citizen. The proper term is ‘previously unconvicted’ and I will not stop until the government and the courts start using the proper term.” And he wasn’t just referring to gun owners, he meant everyone (well, everyone except him that is). To some, it really should be “guilty until proven innocent” I guess.

peterpi

NRA supporters, even if they are not named Ted Nugent, make stupid arguments also.
That says nothing about all NRA members, just as your exchange with a stupid Brady supporter says nothing about all Brady supporters.

DR

No it doesn’t and that wasn’t my intention. I was just saying, Dano’s post reminded me of what he said. Nothing more!

toohip

“stupid Brady supporter?” now THAT’S a broad brush! Pretty judgement on hearsay over an statement that is factual, yet “poorly expressed.” You defend all (or most) Brady supporters, but don’t you need to know more than judging them by this alleged quote? That’s kind of like the same analogy of the “good guy/previously unconvicted/innocent until proven guilty” gun owner. They seem law-abiding, then they use these inanimate objects to break the law . . like the law-abiding/good guy/yada yada Florida thug music Stand Your Ground shooter!

toohip

A slippery argument. . . “law-abiding” vs etc. But you have to agree, that it’s the gun-right that’s making the argument. . or division that someone without a conviction (though they refuse background checks) or criminal (insanity) history is your classic “good guy with a gun.” It’s a broad brush, and it paints the very mass murderers we read about including Holmes, who by definition were “law-abiding citizens” and “good guys with a gun,” Then they miraculously (?) became “bad guys with a gun.” Is it to obvious to cite the common factor in both?

guesswhodrews

As Lavrentiy Beria said, “You bring me the man, I’ll find you the crime.” What is truly scarey is these lefties don’t even know where their tactics take us.

guesswhodrews

Nope, your comment is simply dumb.

Ridiculing freedom is not simply stupid, it shows a huge amount of ignorance. And that goes for all the left wing goofs who love to do it.

Dano2

Speaking of dumb, if you honestly think I’m ridiculing freedom…

Best,

D

guesswhodrews

Yes. However, you don’t think owning a gun is something that is associated with freedom. And free speech doesn’t seem to be something you like either.

Dano2

Thank you Little Man of Many Screen Names for that dishonest characterization and mendacious typing spasm.

We all know you aren’t being honest when you scurrilously claim I’m ridiculing freedom. Your track record here of mendacity, dishonesty and intellectual cravenness tells us that.

Best,

D

guesswhodrews

Once again I’m afflicted with Fremdscham for you.

Dano2

What it’s all about then.

Best,

D

Papa Smurf

“What’s it all about, then?” In two words, differing cultures. Yes, the United States has a long history of gun ownership, and with well over three hundred MILLION working firearms in circulation, there are bound to be many more gun crimes committed than in the other countries mentioned. And yet, these other countries aren’t immune… consider the 2011 massacre that took place in another relatively gun-free society– Norway. A two-stage attack committed by a single person… a car bombing that killed 8 and injured 209, followed two hours later by a mass shooting which claimed the lives of 69 more people, mostly children and teenagers, and wounded 110, many very seriously. This crime dwarfs anything that has taken place here in the United States, and goes to show that these kinds of mass shootings can happen even in countries with extremely restrictive gun laws.

A couple of other points about these numbers. (1) They reflect gun-related deaths to be sure, but they do nothing to shed any light on the overall homicide and violent crime rates per 100,000 in their respective populations, and (2) the heading is misleading, no doubt intentionally. It says, “…guns kill…” To be precise, the guns didn’t kill anyone. In each case, a PERSON did the killing, using a gun as his/her weapon of choice. A gun has no will of its own; it cannot act on its own volition. I know many consider this a distinction without a difference, but let’s keep the responsibility where it belongs, shall we?

Dano2

*eye roll*

People living in a violent society with easy access to killing machines is where the responsibility lies. You can’t make that go away.

Best,

D

eddie47

Anders Breivik of Norway was a right wing extremist hell bent on killing Muslim kids. He was also involved with American groups who advocated for the white race. Know of any? One thing they have in common is the love of guns and the willingness to use them.

guesswhodrews

Breivik was a nutcase who copied much of his manifesto from the unabomber and identified himself as a savior of Christianity. He was sentenced to 21 years in jail for his killing which works out to 3.3 months per killing.

Dano2

[deleted by author]

Papa Smurf

“Think about the school children touring. Suppose one found Rep. Wrightâs gun. Suppose a deranged individual wandered in and got it.” — Laurie Langley

Suppose a buzzard had a radio up his but(t)… there’d be music in the air. Could you possibly be any more overwrought, there, Laurie?

Yes, I believe Rep. Wright was dumber ‘n dirt. Yes, I believe he was irresponsible. And yes, I believe lawmakers, and other state officials, should be subject to the same security checks and restrictions as the rest of us… I said so in the DP “poll.” But if his “colleague” who found his gym bag had simply returned it to him, instead of running to the Sergeant at Arms (now there’s an interesting term in this context) like a little school-yard snitch, we’d have never heard about this in the first place. Does anybody think, even for a moment, that if it had been a fellow Democrat who had left the bag, it would have been otherwise? The cardinal rule of politics: Never miss an opportunity to embarrass or harm the opposition.

Hankalish

Based on her comments, I am thinking that Ms Langley is a supporter of the NRA’s Eddie Eagle firearms safety program for school childrenâŚalthough she did not mention it? Hmmm, curious!?

Dave52

Its possible there was no ID in or on the gym bag. Which would explain why he opened it in the first place.

Now if it can be established that there was an ID either on or in the bag, then you’re entirely correct that its a political stunt.

Papa Smurf

They sat next to each other throughout the hearing… ownership of the bag in question was pretty much certain. He could have at least asked Wright if the bag belonged to him before taking other actions. But… nooooooooooo.

Dave52

If thats the case, and I have no reason to doubt you, then he had no reason to ever open the bag.

jinarvada

The problem is that Wright was careless and irresponsible when he left that bag with a loaded gun behind. It shows that not all gun owners are as responsible and law abiding as the NRA and RMGO want us to believe. This guy was even a former cop, so it shows that even the best can go wrong. He was careless with his weapon. This isn’t about who found it and why they turned it in to the Sergeant of Arms. If Wright was responsible, there would have been no story in the first place.

peterpi

“Does anybody think, even for a moment, that if it had been a fellow Democrat who had left the bag, it would have been otherwise?”
And, this hypothetical is different from the hypothetical you mock at the beginning, how?
But, thank you for thinking that legislators ought to abide by the same security rules as more humble folk.
Thought #2, if the gun in question belonged to a Democratic lawmaker, what would prevent a Republican lawmaker from decrying the hypocrisy?

Papa Smurf

(a) It differs because… When touring the Capitol, are children allowed to wander unsupervised throughout the hearing rooms? I don’t think so. More likely, they view the rooms from a gallery, or from behind a velvet rope at the entrance. The same with all those deranged individuals who so frequently tour the Capitol.
(b) You’re welcome.
(c) I’m not saying it would have been different had their roles been reversed… I was making a general observation of the sorry state to which politics has degenerated. Neither side has a claim to virtue here. And I hate to break it to you this way, Pete, but lot’s of Democrats are gun owners, too. There’s no hypocrisy in that.

peterpi

I know that Dems are gun owners.
Except for Quakers, I doubt there’s a single group within the USA that does not have members who are gun owners.
I agree with you about partisan hypocrisy.

DR

I know many a liberal who are gun owners. In fact, one even has a license to own fully automatic machine guns and he does. He’s also a Prius driving, Obama supporting, Wall Street occupying liberal Democrat and proud of it.

I’ve never really considered the 2nd amendment a liberal or conservative issue. I realize that more gun owners are probably conservative (or lean that way) than liberal, but to me its not the same as say economic ideology or big vs. small government.

Pilgrim

I think I read he was at a concealed weapons hearing. Oh, the irony. It was very irresponsible to space out and leave your loaded weapon behind. It’s the kind of mistake that leads to children accidentally shooting each other in homes all over the US each year.

peterpi

Yeah, the irony caught my attention also.
Unless, …
He deliberately carried a loaded concealed weapon into that committee hearing room to show how harmless and safe concealed weapons are. Yep, that must be it. He wasn’t being sloppy, careless, inattentive, no siree. He wanted to show that happiness is a warm gun.

daweber

Ah Laurie, you poor baby. It must be so sad to be afraid of an inanimate object. Tell me, are you also scared of your shadow?

peterpi

Do you routinely leave a loaded weapon where anyone might grab it?

daweber

No. Neither did Wright. The area where he left it isn’t open to the public. Only authorized persons. Most people, for some reason, believe that a gun will just start going off. Personally, I am not afraid if firearms. It’s silly to be. Being scared of something will get you hurt. Respecting something will allow you to control it. A gun, left alone, is no more dangerous than a daisy.

Pilgrim

Wow. You think it’s OK to leave a loaded gun unattended? With that attitude you shouldn’t be allowed to own a gun. You’d be a danger to the rest of us. My firearms are always secured and I know where they are at all times. It’s not that hard to be responsible and you shouldn’t be making excuses for this guy.

daweber

When I leave to got to work, or to town, ALL my guns are unattended. The word you should be using is misplaced. Nobody in the history of the world has been hurt by an unattended gun. The gun just sits there and occupies space. The only there danger is when somebody picks up the gun.

Pilgrim

Wrong and complete BS. Do you read the paper? Kids find loaded guns and get hurt or killed way too often. Do you understand what unattended means? You must not have any kids or unstable adults in your home to feel so cavalier about the topic.

daweber

collinsdictionary(dot)com

unattended

1. Not looked after or cared for
2. Unaccompanied or alone

When ANYONE touches a gun, it is automatically now being tended to. The issue is who’s hands are doing the tending. Sorry, but I take a literal definition to the word. We have different opinions, and opinions are neither right nor wrong.

Pilgrim

It’s the stupidest argument I’ve heard to date. Is a loaded gun “attended” if a five year picks it up?

daweber

You reading comprehension needs some work. The answer to your question is in what I wrote.

Pilgrim

It’s a stupid argument.

daweber

That is your opinion, are you are free to have it.

toohip

wow, thanks for the privilege!

Dano2

I call that “pretzeling”. Some attempts to make it work are much, much more amusing than others.

Best,

D

toohip

B-I-N-G-O ! “squirming”

guesswhodrews

Well if there is one person who should know a lot about pretzeling, it would be you.

Dano2

Yes, from watching your lame attempts at it – yours are one of the much, much more amusing than others. that I had in mind.

Best,

D

peterpi

That gun was unattended from the time the owner of that gun and briefcase left it there, until the Democratic lawmaker got curious.

Papa Smurf

Yes. In a closed area, not accessible to the public. And it was found, according to some news reports, as the lawmakers were filing out at the conclusion of the session, so it would have been unattended for a matter of a few minutes, or even less. Even if the committee had been in session, as was alluded to earlier, it would have been under the lawmaker’s table where the public wasn’t allowed. As I said in my earlier post, it was both stupid, and irresponsible. But given the actual circumstances of this particular incident, some folks seem to be trying very hard to make the proverbial mountain out of this particular molehill.

daweber

That does fit the definition.

toohip

daweber is desperate to cling to his regretful statement in trying to explain it away. “Nobody in the history of the world has been hurt by an unattended gun.”
(psst, I think he’s referring to an “unattended gun” lying some where in the desert with nobody around for thousands of miles. . then he would be mostly right, er correct ;o)

“Nobody in the history of the world has been hurt by an unattended gun.’ . . said the parent explaining to the police why his/another child is dead.

peterpi

You don’t understand: The moment the child found it, it was an “attended” gun, not an “unattended” one, therefore daweber’s logic is perfect.

Dano2

Freedumb!

Best,

D

daweber

Yep, you have a good handle on the dumb part. You need some help on the free though.

Pilgrim

Sorry – you’re the “maroon”.

daweber

Resorting to name calling. Did you run out of logical arguments?

Pilgrim

I picked it up from your response to Dano and it fits for you.

toohip

I’m rubber you’re glue. . .

toohip

(does not compute)

peterpi

Thank you.
All it takes is to realize there is a difference between a loaded gun and a paperback novel.

peterpi

It was a committee room. When there are public hearings, committee rooms are open to the public.
Regarding your last couple of sentence, that’s a tired meme. No, an unattended gun does not go off on its own, but an unattended gun that someone else finds can be used.
Or do you go around leaving your keys in the ignition of your car?
I mean, what’s the harm? A car is an inanimate object. it’s not harming anyone by just sitting there. It doesn’t hit and run on its own, it doesn’t go joy-riding on its own (**). So, there’s no more harm to leaving your car with the keys in the ignition than there is in waling away from a briefcase with a loaded gun in it, right?

(**) At least, not until driverless cars become equipped with more advanced/autonomous electronics.

daweber

Don’t know what point you are trying to make, but you correct with the car example. Actually people leave cars with the keys in them unattended quite often.

toohip

peter, I just think you armed the gun-right that guns and cars are the inanimate objects that PEOPLE use to cause harm, and both are harmless. Fail.

primafacie

I’m all for gun freedom. I simply choose not to have one, mostly because I’m dangerous enough with power tools and steak knives. But if you or Thor or Rep. Wright or anyone wants to carry a piece, by all means do so. Doesn’t bother me.

But, come on, even a gunny should recognize that leaving your gat lying around isn’t the smartest thing. I don’t even leave my iPhone or golf clubs where I don’t have direct eye sight on them. I certainly wouldn’t do so with a gun. Although I’m insured, I don’t want to tempt someone to steal my stuff.

It doesn’t hurt the liberty argument to say Rep. Wright did a dumb thing and move on.

pchild57

Little kids aren’t afraid of inanimate objects – especially boys. The representative has a two year old – I hope we don’t read about another “tragedy” anytime soon. Here’s a study called “what boys do when they find a real gun” read it and lock your guns up real good okay.

I see the DP is trying to poke the gunnies with a stick again and keep the gun argument going with something that is irrelevant. Have at it people.

Papa Smurf

A little late to the party, aren’t you, there TH? We’ve been cussin’ and discussin’ for quite a while, now… better catch up đ

toohip

I guess Papa, you missed my point. That’s EXACTLY what I’m talking about. Haven’t we debated this issue ad naseam? Shouldn’t the DP wait for an actual gun debate issue, like another recall attempt or bill to reverse the law? This is man bites dog story, and just happened to include the dreaded (gulp!) “gun” topic.
(and peter, wasn’t it you long ago during these nasty debates, alleged to swear off getting involved in this insane debate? ;o)

Papa Smurf

And yet, you’ve contributed to the discussion eleven times now. I guess they kind’a dragged you into it, kicking and screaming all the way, after all. Boy, those folks at the DP are insidious.

primafacie

Yup, bonehead move by Rep. Wright.

Oh, Ms. Langley, I may have drifted too closely to a beige sedan on the freeway yesterday. Had I not detected and corrected by error, the results could have been pretty ugly. But it wasn’t. I do hope you can get to sleep tonight.

toohip

Oh, Mr. Prima, that beige sedan wasn’t designed and sold as something to kill your fellow man. The “results” of Mr. Wright’s careless use of that inanimate object could of had more tragic results than your “drifting” on the freeway.

primafacie

Could have.

But didn’t.

Still a bonehead move by Rep. Wright.

pchild57

This guy has a kid right? Heads up to play-date parents, ask if there’s a gun in the home and where it’s stored. Better yet, just keep your kids out of homes of gun owners.

holyreality

Better yet teach your children what a gun is, and how to unload it to render it harmless before allowing anyone else to touch it.

That’s how I learned at age seven, and I’m still careful to open the chamber to ensure it is empty before ever handing it off to anyone.

pchild57

Sorry dude that doesn’t work anymore – read the study about what boys do when they find a real gun. Doesn’t matter if they are real or not, the boy will grab the gun and shoot it every time. Maybe it’s the result of violent games and movies – the reality of the gun doesn’t sink into the undeveloped brain.

Some idiot in MI was demonstrating gun safety and guess what happened? Yep, he’s dead.

primafacie

Mrs. Facie tells an amusing story about a birthday party for Prima Jr. a few moons ago. We never had toy guns, let alone real ones, in our house, and there were no weapon-like toys as party favors either.

But the boys turned their plastic spoons and forks into “guns” the moment the cake was eaten. Including Prima Jr., whose utensils usually became space ships.

Submitted for your entertainment, indicative of very little.

holyreality

The NRA, before it became the lobby of gun manufacturers was on primarily a safety education mission.
Idiots who negligently fire their weapon certainly fail the NRA safety test.
Now if a boy were to have experience with a gun, knowing the power and responsibility required of handling one, they will disable a “found” gun as a rule of habit.
In these days of video games where a child’s experience with real guns is rare, I can see how your “study” is accurate, but I’d like to see for myself what the demographics of the test subjects were.

The Post won’t let me attach the link…The study is from The American Academy of Pediatrics called Seeing is Believing, What Do Boys Do When They Find A Real Gun. It’s not MY “study” BTW.

holyreality

Ownership is not yours, apologies, but you did refer to it.

I read the link, the 64 subjects only alleged experience with guns is purely what the parents projected as “interest in guns”. Of course curious boys will be boys, I’d expect nothing less. When a boy fires a rifle, and maybe even kills something, they SEE it’s power, and respect must be instilled at that age.

At best this is a shoddy experiment, at worst it is a political stunt. Try putting a trained child who respects the weapon and knows how to disable it in the group. I trust a redneck kid with a gun far more than some video gamer surburbanite every time.

Dano2

The availability of firearms is a strong risk factor for both homicide and suicide. But the study came to another conclusion that is rarely mentioned in the gun control debate: females are uniquely impacted by the availability of a firearm. Indeed, the study found that women with access to firearms become homicide victims at significantly higher rates than men.

Study: annals(d0t)org/article.aspx?articleid=1814426

Best,

D

toohip

“pesky facts!”

Dano2

This:

Best,

D

Tbone

FREEDUMB!!!!!11111!ONE

tomfromthenews

I’m recalling that one elected city supervisor in San Francisco once found his way into city hall past the metal detectors and wound up assassinating the mayor and another city supervisor. You may have heard of him: Harvey Milk.

primafacie

Harvey Milk did nothing of the sort, and he certainly didn’t find a gun lying around.

It was Dan White, a former supervisor, who got “past” those metal detectors by climbing in through a window. He then killed Milk, a supervisor, and mayor George Moscone.

tomfromthenews

You misread what I wrote (or else I just did a bad job of communicating). You may have heard of “him”, the “other city supervisor” who was killed. Of course I know Dan White did it and not Harvey!! Sheesh!

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.

To reach the Denver Post editorial page by phone: 303-954-1331

Recent Comments

peterpi: I think I have this correct: Voters in Jefferson County elected school board members that the superintendent...

peterpi: Sounds good to me. For future employees. I believe police and fire dept. brass have also been known to get...